Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PapaBear3625

“I realize your sarcasm, but do you realize that if we keep getting terrorist attacks, your scenario may indeed come to pass?”

What’s wrong with defending ourselves from an enemy that is out to kill us by enacting laws that allow us to readily identify who our enemy is and where they are located?

Furthermore, if the cohort of enemy combatants are in fact the enemy’s civilian population (which in the war on terrorism that is exactly who the enemy is) does that not make the enemy’s civilian population a valid military target? In fact the PRIMARY target?


54 posted on 03/14/2010 8:59:24 PM PDT by AussieJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: AussieJoe

In World War 2, our bombing campaigns did not distinguish between soldiers and the civilians who supplied the soldiers. We drifted away from that in Vietnam and afterward. If it comes to an existential fight, we will go back to that doctrine.


57 posted on 03/15/2010 7:19:31 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (Public healthcare looks like it will work as well as public housing did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson